The Supreme Court allows Trump to fire FTC Commissioners
In the split order, the Supreme Court has made clear the way for Trump to eliminate Federal Trade Commission member Rebecca Kelly Slaughter.
Straight Arrow News
Washington provided his view that there is nothing sacred about the precedent as the Supreme Court is about to revisit some key decisions.
“At some point we need to think about what we are doing in our staring decision,” Judge Clarence Thomas said of the legal term protecting the stability of the law. “And that’s not some kind of amulet deal where you can just say ‘glare decision’ and turn your brain off without thinking. ”
Thomas provided that view on September 25th with a rare public appearance at the Columbus School of Law at the Catholic University.
He was asked about factors he considered when deciding whether his past decisions were incorrect and did not address pending cases.
In his term, which begins next month, the court will revisit a nearly century-old ruling protecting the heads of independent bodies that President Donald Trump has repeatedly challenged as he seeks greater control over the government.
The High Court supported the constitution that fell into a 1935 decision on Humphrey’s Enforcer vs. the United States, preventing members of the Federal Trade Commission from being fired for no reason.
When the majority said Trump could fire the FTC’s last Democrat, Judge Ellen Kagan wrote in her opposition that her colleagues would “rar” to overturn Humphrey’s enforcer.
That’s not the only thing that courts can be promoted.
The administration has called on the court to support Trump’s changes to birthright citizenship, which threatens the 127-year-old Supreme Court decision.
In another case, Republicans argue that the 2001 decision limits the fact that parties and other messages that can be spent in collaboration with federal candidates on advertising and other messaging is no longer meaningful.
And the courts could hinder the important provisions of the Voting Rights Act that they had previously upheld.
All of these are when the High Court agrees to or is expected to hear.
What’s less certain is whether justice wants to revisit the 2015 decision to legalize same-sex marriage across the country.
The former Kentucky County Clerk, who refused to issue a same-sex marriage license in 2015 due to her religious beliefs, asked the court to do so.
However, many legal experts believe it is unlikely that the court will consider her appeal.
The judge refused to intervene in 2020 early in her challenge.
Thomas then wrote that Davis’ case was a “severe reminder” to the outcome of the court’s same-sex marriage decision, but that questions about the verdict “didn’t present neatly.”
Thomas was Roev in 2022. It was one of the judiciaries voted to overturn Wade.
At the Catholic University, Thomas said he respected precedents, but said, “Precedents should respect our legal traditions, our country and our laws, and be based on something, not just on what someone else has dreamed of and what others have done together.”
“I don’t think I have the gospel,” he said.
